Rights of audience: who can speak in which court

The right to appear before a court and argue a case, known as a right of audience, is one of the things the law reserves to people who are properly authorised to do it. It is not simply a matter of knowing the law; it is a formal permission to address the court, examine witnesses and conduct advocacy on a client’s behalf. Under the Legal Services Act 2007, exercising a right of audience is one of a handful of reserved legal activities, meaning it can only be carried out by someone authorised or exempt. Doing it without authority is a criminal offence, which is how seriously the system treats the point.

The popular image is that barristers do the advocacy and solicitors do the paperwork, and there is a kernel of truth in it, but the modern position is more layered. Barristers are trained as specialist advocates and have full rights of audience in all courts, from the magistrates’ court up to the Supreme Court. Solicitors also have rights of audience, but historically these were confined to the lower courts, principally the magistrates’ courts and the county court, with the higher courts reserved to the Bar.

That division softened over recent decades. Solicitors can now obtain higher rights of audience, qualifying as solicitor-advocates entitled to appear in the higher courts, including the Crown Court, the High Court and above. Doing so requires a further qualification demonstrating advocacy competence, rather than following automatically from admission as a solicitor. The result is that a solicitor with higher rights can conduct a serious trial from start to finish, while a solicitor without them will still instruct a barrister, or a solicitor-advocate colleague, for the courtroom work.

Rights of audience are not limited to the two best-known professions. Legal executives regulated through CILEX can acquire rights of audience in defined circumstances, and various tribunals operate more openly, allowing representation by people who would not have a right of audience in the ordinary courts. The common thread is that each right flows from authorisation by an approved regulator operating under the framework of the 2007 Act, and is defined by the courts and proceedings it covers rather than being a single blanket permission.

For a client, the practical question is usually who will actually stand up in court, and it is a fair one to ask. The answer determines both the expertise brought to the hearing and, often, the cost. Understanding that advocacy is a regulated, reserved activity, and that not every lawyer holds the right to conduct it in every court, explains why cases are frequently a team effort, with one lawyer preparing the ground and another, specifically authorised for the forum, doing the speaking.